JUDGMENT :

R.S. Sarkaria, J. - This appeal by special leave directed against a judgment, dated May 3, 1962, of the Delhi High Court, arises out of these circumstances :

M.S. Kochar the respondent herein, filed a complaint in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Delhi, alleging that the appellants herein, who are officers of the Customs Department, had committed offences under Sections 120-B/166/409, Indian Penal Code. It was stated in the complaint as follows :

The complainant was the sole representative in India of various manufacturing concerns in West Germany, and was carrying on business under the style of "House of German Machinery". He imported certain items of machinery from the German firms for displaying them in the International Industries Fair held in New Delhi in November 1961. In spite of the fact that he had obtained a valid Customs Clearance Permit for the import of these items of machinery the Customs Authorities prevented him from clearing the goods from the Railway Station. Ultimately the complainant was able to clear the goods by obtaining the necessary permission from the Government. He was allowed to retain the imported goods with him till the first of June, 1962. The goods were to be re-exported from India the reafter. The respondent applied for extension of the period, but his request was declined.

2. On June 16, 1962 the accused (appellants) raided the premises of the complainant at 30, Pusa Road, New Delhi, and seized some of those imported goods which were meant for display in the International Industries Fair.

The appellants also seized certain other goods kept by the complainant at the site of the Fair, itself. Inventories of the goods were prepared by the appellants at the time of their seizure. The goods were then packed in boxes and sealed by the appellants with their own seals which were signed by the complainant as well as the appellants. One copy of the inventories, duly signed by the appellants and the complainant, also, was handed over to time.

3. On November 28, 1963 the complainant made an application before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, praying that the goods seized by the appellants be handed over to him on Superdari as they were likely to deteriorate unless kept safely under proper conditions. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, on January 22, 1964, made an order directing that all the goods seized by the appellants be handed over to the complainant on Superdari.

4. The Customs, however, felt aggrieved by this order of the Magistrate and went in revision against it before the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, who, on February 7, 1964, passed an order staying delivery of possession. Subsequently, by order dated April 3, 1965 the Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the revision-petition and vacated the stay order. In spite of the order of the Magistrate, confirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge the Customs handed over to the complainant on Superdari only a part of the goods seized and a in respect of the remaining goods the Customs Authorities went in further revision to the High Court and obtained an interim stay of the order of the Additional Sessions Judge.

5. Subsequently, on August 22, 1966 the High Court made an order directing that all the goods which had been seized by the Customs Authorities from the complainant, including those which had been returned to him on Superdari, should be produced before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, who was seized of a case under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act and Section 166 (81) of the Sea Customs Act, regarding the goods, pending against the complainant. Accordingly, Shri H.L. Sikka, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, prepared two inventories of these goods on November 16, 1966 and thereafter the boxes were opened before Shri Sikka, who got inventories of the goods found therein prepared, and after noting the condition of those goods, he got the same repacked and sealed in proper boxes in the presence of the parties with a seal of the C